1 ORDER SHEET WBCHCA0550612025 Item No.30 Ct. No. 1 RP IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE WPA(P)/520/2025 SRI NARAYAN MAITY ]… Petitioner VS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. ]… Respondents Appearance : Mr. Achyut Basu. Ms. Punam Basu Mr. Anirban Saha Mr. Srikumar Chakraborty Mr. Amritansu Sengupta Ms. Sulagna Sen ]… Advocate for Petitioner Mr. Rajdeep Mazumdar, Ld. AAG Mr. Ajit Kumar Mishra, Ld. AGP Mr. Madhu Jana Mr. Gopal Krishna Sarkar Mr. M.M. Ghosh ]… Advocate for State Mr. Sarwar Jahan Mr. Sumitava Chakraborty ]… Advocate for Respondent No.7 Mr. Subhrangsu Panda Ms. Haritri Roy ] … Advocate for Respondent Nos.6, 9 and 10 CORAM: RAVINDRA VITHALRAO GHUGE, CHIEF JUSTICE & OM NARAYAN RAI J. Date :29.09.2026 2 Order (Per Court) 1. We have heard the Learned Advocate for the Petitioner for quite some time. 2. The Petitioner claims to be a social worker, who is around 75 years of age. He has no connection with any educational institution. There is no such description in the memo of Petition indicating that he is working in the educational sector or in an educational institution. 3. It is stated in the Petition that, ‘the Petitioner is associated with Arya Pratinidhi Sabha, Bengal. In several institutions, there is corruption. Several persons are indulging in corruption. Corruption has been made even while appointing employees’. Besides such allegations, there is no research made by the Petitioner. No data is placed before us to indicate as to which are the employees were illegally selected, appointed and inducted into employment. 4. This Court cannot start a roving enquiry on the basis of reckless allegations, which are not supported with any data or information. The object of filing a PIL is to advance the cause of the public, to do good for the public. In the instant case, we do not find any instance indicating that a particular 3 employee was illegally appointed. Moreover, in rare situations can a PIL Petition be entertained in service jurisprudence. 5. In such circumstances, we do not desire to entertain such a PIL Petition and the same is, therefore, dismissed. (OM NARAYAN RAI , J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE) Chief Justice